Mustang, Before I took my position I read the building safety codes for NYC/S. I looked up up the standard forms about building material use on file with NYC fire and police as is and was required by state and federal law. The warnings were all there and when firemen are not putting out fires in NYC (or anywhere else) they are visiting their districts and reviewing those "special" requirements of each building. They were indeed "aware" and "equipped" The right stuff was "on the truck". They simply neglected to put it on.
They don their protective equipment every time they leave the firehouse.... was this emergency happening any faster than any other ? NO. They simply ignored their training. As to it being an "attack on America", fine but why pay these people more or allow them greater benefits than the military ? (they were already getting that prior to the event). If it were an attack then the old "Militia" laws should have applied. As to names for the other sites... why ask, there are none. They showed up at the pentagon wearing the equipment and following their training.... it was on the truck. The problem at the Pentagon was taken care of by lesser paid, lesser trained, people that simply paid attention in the site visits and training classes. It is NOT the fact that they were paid but the fact that they were FULLY insured for this. A summary from NYC Code and the cases about EXACTLY this scenario: Full pay and benefits for life, Full pay and benefits for the widow. This is why the country is going broke.... This was NOT a rural, volunteer fire Dept. with limited resources. GML 207-c provides for continuation of first party benefits, i.e., payment of salary, wages, medical and hospital expenses of policemen with injuries or illness incurred in the performance of their duties. The statute was originally passed in 1961. This statute provides for the payment of full salary to police and other municipal workers injured in the performance of their duties. The statute has been amended from time to time to add classes of employees in addition to fire and police officers, the Legislature each time pointing to the important and sometimes strenuous and dangerous risks other employees take in doing their duties. In a trio of Article 78 appeals reaching the Court of Appeals, the municipalities urged that a heightened risk standard should be used to determine eligibility for such payment which often lead to permanent disability payments. The court rejects such a standard since it is not contained in the original statute or in any successive amendments pointing to the fact that municipalities have always awarded 207-a benefits to firefighters irrespective of whether the injury causing activity was one entailing the "heightened risk" of firefighters. In each of the three cases, the various Appellate Divisions applied a heightened risk standard and upheld the municipalities denial of 207-c benefits and all were reversed citing the legislative history and express will of the Legislature which does not restrict eligibility on that criteria. On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Mustang <[email protected]> wrote: > I gave you a direct answer already. I'll elaborate a little. > > There was rubble, debris, burning toxic crud, and crap in the canyons of > the city streets as opposed to the relatively open areas at the Pentagon and > Pennsylvania. Many, many, more people were trapped in the cloud for hours > and days at a time, plus the duration of the cleanup in the city. In a > sudden emergency, or in this case a major disaster with totally unexpected > confusion and communication problems, some people pitch in asap to help > without saying "Wait right there. Don't go anywhere. I'm going to run over > to the supply cabinet and get a mask. And industrial strength gloves. And > protective overalls. And eye protection. And a hard hat. I'll be right > back." It stands to reason that there would be respiratory problems after > breathing that junk, even if it was for only a minute or two. How much dirt > and building material dust can a pair of lungs handle? It was an attack > against the entire country, not against NYC. > > Your second question... "Did they not have the training necessary to do > their jobs?" You answered "Yes." Correct. They did not have the > training necessary to do their jobs. How would anyone have the imagination > be able to plan for that magnitude of devastation on that day? It wasn't a > hurricane, blizzard, or earthquake. Something like that had never happened > before. It wasn't considered a war zone on 9/10. Civilians aren't trained > in disaster preparation. Most haven't a clue where the emergency stairs and > exits are located, let alone how to react on that day. How could anyone > "train" for that? The SOP book would be impossible to conceive. Even with > a knee jerk reaction, piss to put out the fire, I doubt that there's an SOP > available today. > > As to names from the other sites... you call them "non-existent", rather > than just asking for names. That made me think of tommy [sic]. I don't > know of any names. NYC was a very different type catastrophe in a > dissimilar place. It's possible there aren't any. Maybe there should be. > Maybe not. > > It's conceivable that the Pentagon had better preparation, drills, and > equipment due to its personnel and its purpose on the planet. In PA, it was > an open field. Responders already knew it was a crashed plane. There > weren't imploding, collapsing, humongous buildings with thousands of > civilians possibly injured or trapped. Emergency response had a little more > time to recognize what hazards could be expected. Planes have crashed > before. Crap happens. That area could have been closed off to unequipped > personnel. > > The country was attacked. It's that simple. > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Mark <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Thu, December 23, 2010 4:52:19 PM > > *Subject:* Re: GOP say's "no" to 9-11 responders health care > > Yeah, Right, If that were the case there would be some names from those > other sites on the benefits list....show me one of those non-existent names > please. > > > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Mustang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> "Just how does any liability New York City may or may not have translate >> into the responsibility for someone from Maine, Utah or North Dakota ?" >> >> It wasn't an attack aimed at NYC residents - in addition to the Pentagon >> and the crash in Pennsylvania - it the USA that was attacked. Our entire >> nation was targeted and affected regardless of the specific locations. >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Mark <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Sent:* Wed, December 22, 2010 2:19:52 PM >> *Subject:* Re: GOP say's "no" to 9-11 responders health care >> >> Actually You are very wrong. Guiliani ran on two tickets when elected... >> Republican and Liberal parties... The conservative party candidate as >> well as the democrat went down in flames. >> >> Guiliani Represented the City of New York, not the Federal Government. >> Anything he said is for and about New York City. >> >> Just how does any liability New York City may or may not have translate >> into the responsibility for someone from Maine, Utah or North Dakota ? >> >> It is a direct question... How about a direct answer... >> >> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 4:06 PM, studio <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Dec 22, 9:16 am, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Were these responders not employed by the state/city of New York ?? >>> > Yes >>> > >>> > Did they not have the training necessary to do their jobs ? Yes >>> > >>> > Did they ignore that training ? Yes >>> > >>> > Did they not have insurance and benefits that far outstrip the >>> > private sector (a big reason for New Yorks City and State financial >>> > woes ? Yes >>> > >>> > Do the surviving spouses not collect for LIFE a full pension >>> > already ?? Yes >>> > >>> > Now you want to take BILLIONS from the general population to give a >>> > "bonus" to some of the most expensive and best insured employees for >>> > having ignored their training ?? Yes >>> >>> And were they told that the air was ok to breathe without respirators >>> by Conservative in charge Rudolph Gulianni? >>> Yes. >>> >>> The firefighters and police in NYC are pissed at Republicans no matter >>> how you hope to spin it. >>> >>> "I say to those who are trying to help us, thank you. >>> And to those trying to block it I say, get out of the way" - Spokesman >>> for the First Responders >>> >>> As per usual, Republicans are playing dumb, don't know who they're >>> talking to, what it's about, who it's for, or why there's a need. >>> That's why they're called the Stupid Party. >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mark M. Kahle H. >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> > > > > -- > Mark M. Kahle H. > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Mark M. Kahle H. -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
